MHO 


uorresponaence 
Conf  Pam  12mo  #940 


EXECUTIVE  DOCUMENTS. 


No.  5. 


CORRESPONDENCE 


BETWEEN 


ISAAC  W.  HAYNE, 

Special    Envoy, 


AND 


THE    PRESIDENT 


RELATING     TO 


FORT  SUMTER. 


CHARLESTON: 

STEAM-POWER    PRESSES     OF    EVANS    ii    COGSWELL, 
No.  3  Broad  and  103  East  Bay  Street 

1861. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2011  with  funding  from 
Duke  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/correspondencebe06unit 


CORRESPONDENCE. 


No.  1. 
[MR.  hayne  to  the  president  of  the  united  states] 

Washington,  January  31,  1861. 

To  his  Excellency,  James  Buchanan.  President : 

Sir  : — 1  had  the  honor  to  hold  a  short  interview  with  you  on 
14th  instant,  informal  and  unofficial.  Having  previously  been 
informed  that  you  desired  that  whatever  was  official  should  be, 
on  both  sides,  conducted  by  written  communications,  I  did  not 
at  thai  time  present  my  credentials,  but  verbally  informed  you 
that  I  bore  a  letter  from  the  Governor  of  South  Carolina  in 
regard  to  the  occupation  of  Fort  Sumter,  which  I  would  deliver 
the  next  day  under  cover  of  a  written  communication  from 
myself.  The  next  day,  before  such  communication  could  be 
made,  I  was  waited  upon  by  a  Senator  from  Alabama,  who 
stated  that  he  came  on  the  part  of  all  the  Senators  then  in 
Washington  from  the  States  which  had  already  seceded  from 
the  United  States,  or  would  certainly  have  done  so  before  the 
1st  day  of  February  next.  The  Senator  from  Alabama  urged, 
that,  he  and  they  were  interested  in  the  subject  of  my  mission, 
in  almost  an  equal  degree  with  the  authorities  of  South  Caro- 
lina. He  said,  that,  hostilities,  commenced  between  South  Car- 
olina and  your  Government,  would  necessarily  involve  the 
States  represented  by  themselves  in  civil  strife,  and  fearing 
that  the  action  of  South  Carolina  might  complicate  the  rela- 
tions of  your  Government  to  the  seceded  and  seceding  States, 
and,  thereby,  interfere  with  a  peaceful  solution  of  existing 
difficulties,  these  Senators  requested  that  I  would  withhold  my 
message  to   yourself  until  a  consultation   among   themselves 


could  be  had.  To  this  T  agreed,  and  the  result  of  the  consulta- 
tion was  the  letter  of  these  Senators  addressed  to  me,  dated 
15th  January,  a  copy  of  which  is  in  your  possession.  To  this 
letter  I  replied  on  the  17th,  and  a  cdpy  of  that  reply  is  likewise 
in  your  possession.  This  correspondence,  as  T  am  informed, 
was  made  the  subject  of  a  communication  from  Senators  Fitz- 
patrick,  Mallory,  and  Slidell,  addressed  to  you,  and  your  atten- 
tion called  to  tin1  contents.  These  gentlemen  received  on  the 
22d  day  of  .January,  a  reply  to  their  application,  conveyed  in 
a  letter  addressed  to  them,  dated  2'^d,  signed  by  the  Hon.  J. 
BOLT,  Secretary  of  War,  n<l  interim.  Of  this  letter,  you,. of 
course,  have  a  copy.  This  letter  from  Mr.  Holt  was  communi- 
cated to  me  under  the  cover  of  a  letter  from  all  the  Senators  of 
the  seceded  and  seceding.  States,  who  still  remained  in  Wash- 
ington; and  of  this  letter,  too,  I  am  informed,  you  have  been 
furnished  with  a  copy. 

This  reply  of  yours  through  the  Secretary  of  War,  ad  inti  rimt 
to  the  application  made  by  the  Senators,  was  entirely  unsatis- 
factory to  me.  It  appeared  to  me  to  be  not  only  a  rejection, 
in  advance,  of  the  main  proposition  made  by  these  Senators. 
to  wit:  that  "an  arrangement  should  bo  agreed  on  between 
the  authorities  of  South  Carolina  and  your  Government,  at 
least  until  the  loth  February  next,  by  which  time  South  Car- 
olina and  the  States  represented  by  the  Senators  might,  in 
Convention,  devise  a  wise,  just,  and  peaceable  solution  of  exist- 
ing difficulties ;  "in  the  meantime,"  they  say,  "we  think,  (that 
is,  these  Senators,)  that  your  State  (South  Carolina)  should 
suffer  Major  Anderson  to  obtain  necessary  supplies  of  food, 
fuel  or  water,  and  enjoy  free  communication  by  post  or  spe- 
cial messenger  with  the  President,  upon  the  understanding 
that  the  President  will  not  send  him  reinforcements  during 
the  same  period;"  but,  besides  this  rejection  of  the  main  prop- 
osition, there  was  in  Mr.  Holt's  letter,  a  distinct  refusal  to  make 
any  stipulation  on  the  subject  of  reinforcement,  even  for  the 
short  time  that  might  be  required  to  communicate  with  my 
Government. 

This  reply  to  the  Senators  was,  as  I  have  stated,  altogether 
unsatisfactory  to  me,  and  I  felt  sure  that  it  would  be  so  to  the 
authorities  Whom  I  represented.  It  was  not,  however,  ad- 
dressed to  me,  or  to  the  authorities  of  South  Carolina;  and,  as 
South  Carolina  had  addressed  nothing  to  your  Government,  and 


had  asked  nothing  at  your  hands,  I  looked  not  to  Mr.  Holt's 
letter,  but  to  the  note  addressed  to  me  by  the  Senators  of  the 
seceded  and  seceding  States.  I  had  consented  to  withhold  my 
message  at  their  instance,  provided  they  could  get  assurances 
satisfactory  to  them,  that  no  reinforcements  would  be  sent  to 
Fort  Sumter  in  the  interval,  and  that  the  peace  should  not  be 
disturbed  by  any  act  of  hostility.  The  Senators  expressed 
in  their  note  to  me  of  the  23d  inst.,  their  "  entire  confidence 
that  no  reinforcements  will  be  sent  to  Fort  Sumter,  nor  will  the 
public  peace  be  disturbed  within  the  period  requisite  for  full 
communication  between  you  (myself)  and  your  (my)  Govern- 
ment," and  renewed  their  request  that  I  would  withhold  the 
communication  with  which  I  stood  charged,  and  await  further 
instructions.  This  I  have  done.  The  further  instructions 
arrived  on  the  30th  inst..  and  bear  date  the  26th.  I  now  have 
the  honor  to  make  to  you  my  first  communication  a>  Special 
Envoy  from  the  Government  of  South  Carolina.  You  will  find 
enclosed  the  original  communication  to  the  President  of  the 
United  States  from  the  Governor  of  South  Carolina,  with 
which  I  was  charged  in  Charleston  on  the  12th  day  of  January, 
instant,  the  day  on  which  it  bears  date.  I  am  now  instructed 
by  the  Governor  of  South  Carolina  to  say,  that  "  his  opinion  as 
to  the  propriety  of  the  demand  which  is  contained  in  this  letter 
has  not  only  been  confirmed  by  the  circumstances  which  your 
(my)  mission  has  developed,  but  is  now  increased  to  a  convic- 
tion of  its  necessity.  The  safety  of  the  State  requires  that  the 
position  of  the  President  should  be  distinctly  understood.  The 
safety  of  all  seceding  States  requires  it  as  much  as  the  safety 
of  South  Carolina.  If  it  be  so,  that  Fort  Sumter  is  held  as 
property,  then  as  property,  the  rights,  whatever  they  may  be,  of 
the  United  States,  can  be  ascertained,  and  for  the  satisfaction 
of  these  rights  the  pledge  of  the  State  of  South  Carolina  you 
are  (I  am)  authorized  to  give."  "  If  Fort  Sumter  is  not  held 
as  property,  it  is  held,"  say  my  instructions,  "as  a  military 
post,  and  such  a  post  within  the  limits  of  South  Carolina  can- 
not be  tolerated." 

You  will  perceive  that  it  is  upon  the  presumption  that  it  is 
solely  as  property  that  you  continue  to  hold  Fort  Sumter,  that 
I  have  been  selected  for  the  performance  of  the  duty  upon 
which  I  have  entered.  I  do  not  come  as  a  military  man  to 
demand  the  surrender  of  a  fortress,  but  as  the  le^a!  officer  of 


the  ;  -  Attorney  General,  to  claim  tor  the  Si  air  the  excr- 

of  its  undoubted  rigbl  of  eminent  domain,  ami  to  pledge 

the  State  to  make  good  all  injury  lo  the  rights  of  property 
which  may  arise  from  the  exercise  of  the  claim. 

South    Carolina,   as   a    separate,    independent    sovereignty, 

assumes  the  right  to  take  into  her  possession  everything  within 
her  limits  essential  to  maintain  her  honor  or  her  safety,  irre- 
spective of  the  question  of  property,  subject  only  to  the  moral 
duty  requiring  that  compensation  should  be  made  to  the  owner. 

This  righl  she  cannot  permit  to  be  drawn  into  discussion.  As 
io  compensation  for  any  property,  whether  of  an  individual  or 
a  Government,  which  she  may  deem  it  necessary  for  her  honor 
or  safety  to  take  into  her  possession,  her  past  history  gives 
ample  guaranty  that  it  will  he  made,  upon  a  fair  accounting. 
to  the  last  dollar.  The  proposition  now  is,  that  her  law  officer 
should,  under  authority  of  the  Governor  and  his  Council,  dis- 
tinctly pledge  the  faith  of  South  Carolina  to  make  such  com- 
p  ligation  in  regard  to  Fort  Sumter,  and  its  appurtenances  and 
contents,  to  the  full  extent  of  the  money  value  of  the  property 
of  the  United  States,  delivered  over  to  the  authorities  of  South 
( 'arolina,  by  your  command. 

I  will  not  suppose  that  a  pledge  like  this  can  be  considered 
insufficient  security.  Is  not  the  money  value  of  the  property 
of  the  United  States  in  this  fort,  situated  where  it  cannot  be 
made  available  to  the  United  States  for  any  one  purpose  for 
which  it  was  originally  constructed,  worth  more  to  the  United 
States  than  the  property  itself?  Why,  then,  as  'property,  insist 
on  holding  it  by  an  armed  garrison?  Yet  such  has  been  the 
ground  upon  which  you  have  invariably  placed  your  occupancy 
of  this  fort  by  troops;  beginning,  prospectively,  with  your 
annual  Message  of  the  4th  December;  again  in  your  special 
Message  of  the  9th  January,  and  still  more  emphatically  in 
your  Message  of  the  28th  January.  The  same  position  is  set 
forth  in  your  reply  to  the  Senators,  through  the  Secretary  of 
War,  ad  interim.  It  is  there  virtually  conceded  that  Fort  Sum- 
ter "is  held  merely  as  property  of  the  United  States,  which 
you  deem  it  your  duty  to  protect  and  preserve. " 

Again,  it  is  submitted  that  the  continuance  of  an  armed  pos- 
session actually  jeopards  the  property  you  desire  to  protect. 
It  is  impossible  but  that  such  a  possession,  if  continued  long- 
enough,   must  lead  to   collision.      No   people  not   completely 


abject  and  pusillanimous,  could  submit,  indefinitely  to  the 
armed  occupation  of  a  fortress  in  the  midst  of  the  harbor  of 
its  principal  city,  and  commanding  the  ingress  and  egr< 
every  ship  that  enters  the  port;  the  daily  ferry  boats  that  ply 
upon  the  waters,  moving  but  at  the  sufferance  of  aliens.  An 
attack  upon  this  fort  would  scarcely  improve  it  as  property 
whatever  the  result,  and,  if  captured,  it  would  no  longer  be  the 
subject  of  account. 

To  protect  Fort  Sumter,  merely  as  property,  it  is  submitted 
that  an  armed  occupancy  is  not  only  unnecessary,  but  that  it 
is  manifestly  the  worst  possible  means  which  can  be  resorted 
to  for  such  an  object. 

Your  reply  to  the  Senators,  through  Mr.  Holt,  declares  it  to 
be  your  sole  object  "  to  act  strictly  on  the  defensive,  and  to 
authorize  no  movement  against  South  Carolina  unless  justified 
by  a  hostile  movement  on  their  part,"  yet,  in  reply  to  the  pro- 
position  of  the  Senators  that  no  reinforcements  should  be  sent 
to  Fort  Sumter,  provided  South  Carolina  agrees  that  during 
the  same  period  no  attack  should  be  made,  you  say:  -It  is 
impossible  for  me  (your  Secretary;  to  give  y<m  (the  Senators 
any  such  assurance,"  that  it  "  would  be  a  manifest  violation  of 
his  (your)  duty  to  place  himself  (yourself)  under  engagements 
that  he  (you)  would  not  perform  the  duty  either  for  an  inderi- 
nite  or  a  limited  period." 

In  your  Message  of  the  28th  inst.,  in  expressing  yourself  in 
regard  to  a  similar  proposition,  you  say:  "However  strong 
may  be  my  desire  to  enter  into  such  an  agreement,  I  am  con- 
vinced that  I  do  not  possess  the  power.  Congress,  and  Con- 
gress alone,  under  the  war-making  power,  can  exercise  the  dis- 
cretion of  agreeing  to  abstain  'from  any  and  all  acts  calculated 
to  produce  a  collision  of  arms'  between  this  and  other  govern- 
ments. It  would,  therefore,  be  a  usurpation  for  the  Executive 
to  attempt  to  restrain  their  hands  by  an  agreement  in  regard 
to  matters  over  which  he  has  no  Constitutional  control.  If  he 
were  thus  to  act,  they  might  pass  laws  which  he  should  be 
bound  to  obey,  though  in  conflict  with  his  agreement."  The 
proposition,  it  is  suggested,  was  addressed  to  you  under  tin- 
laws  as  they  now  are,  and  was  not  intended  to  refer  to  a  new 
condition  of  things  arising  under  new  legislation.  It  was 
addressed  to  the  Executive  discretion,  acting  under  existing 
laws.      If  Congress  should,  under    the  war-making  power,  or 


8 

in  any  other  way,  Legislate  in  a  manner  to  affect   the  peace  of 

South  Carolina,  her   interests  or  beT  rights,   it  would  not   be 

lomplished  in    Becret.      South   Carolina   would   have   timely 

notice,    and   she   would,    I    trust,   endeavor    to    meet    the    emer- 

It  is  added  in  the  letter  of  Mr.  Holt,  that  "at  the  present 
moment  it  is  not  deemed  necessary  to  reinforce  Rfaj or  Ander- 
son, because  he  makes  no  such  request,  and  feels  quite  secure 
in  his  position.  But  should  his  safety  require  it,  every  effort 
will  be  made  to  supply  reinforcements."  This  would  seem 
to  ignore  the  other  branch  of  the  proposition  made  by  the  Sen- 
ators,  viz:  that  no  attack  was  to  be  made  on  Fort  Sumter  dur- 
ing the  period  suggested,  and  that  Major  Anderson  should  en- 
joy the  facilities  of  communication,  &c,  &c. 

J  advert  to  this  point,  however,  for  the  purpose  of  saying 
that  to  sL-nd  reinforcements  to  Fort  Sumter  could  not  serve  as  a 
means  of  protecting  and  preserving  PROPERTY,  for,  as  must  be 
known  to  your  Government,  it  would  inevitably  lead  to  imme- 
diate hostilities,  in  which  property  on  all  sides  would  neces- 
sarily suffer. 

South  Carolina  has  every  disposition  to  preserve  the  public 
I  ace,  and  feels,  I  am  sure,  in  full  force,  those  high,  "Chris- 
tian and  moral  duties"  referred  to  by  your  Secretary,  and  it 
is  submitted  that  on  her  part  there  is  scarcely  any  considera- 
tion of  mere  property,  apart  from  honor  and  safety,  which 
could  induce  her  to  do  ought  to  jeopard  that  peace,  still  less  to 
inaugurate  a  protracted  and  bloody  civil  war.  She  rests  her 
position  on  something  higher  than  mere  property.  It  is  a  con- 
sideration of  her  own  dignity  as  a  sovereign,  and  the  safety  of 
her  people,  which  prompts  her  to  demand  that  this  property 
should  not  longer  be  used  as  a  military  post  by  a  Government 
she  no  longer  acknowledges.  She  feels  this  to  be  an  impera- 
tive duty.  It  has,  in  fact,  become  an  absolute  necessity  of 
her  condition. 

Repudiating,  as  you  do,  the  idea  of  coercion,  avowing  peace- 
ful intentions  and  expressing  a  patriot's  horror  for  civil  war 
and  bloody  strife  among  those  who  once  were  brethren,  it 
is  hoped  that  on  further  consideration  you  will  not,  on  a 
mere  question  of  property,  refuse  the  reasonable  demand  of 
South  Carolina,  which  honor  and  necessity  alike  compel  her  to 
vindicate.     Should  you  disappoint  this  hope,  the  responsibility 


9 

for  the  result  surely  does  not  rest  with  her.  If  the  evils  of  war 
are  to  be  encountered,  especially  the  calamities  of  civil  war,  an 
elevated  statesmanship  would  seem  to  require  that  it  should  be 
accepted  as  the  unavoidable  alternative  of  something  still  more 
disastrous,  such  as  national  dishonor  or  measures  materially 
affecting  the  safety  or  permanent  interests  of  a  people — that  it 
should  be  a  choice  deliberately  made,  and  entered  upon  as  war. 
and  of  set  purpose.  But  that  war  should  be  the  incident  or 
accident,  attendant  on  a  policy  professedly  peaceful,  and  not 
recpiired  to  effect  the  object  which  is  avowed  as  the  only  end 
intended,  can  only  be  excused  when  there  has  been  no  warning 
given  as  to  the  consequences. 

I  am  further  instructed  to  say,  that  South  Carolina  cannot, 
by  her  silence,  appear  to  acquiesce  in  the  imputation  that  she 
was  guilty  of  an  act  of  unprovoked  aggression  in  tiring  on  the 
Star  of  the  West.  Though  an  unarmed  vessel,  she  was  filled 
with  armed  men  entering  her  territory  against  her  will,  with 
the  purpose  of  reinforcing  a  garrison,  held,  within  her  limits, 
against  her  protest.  She  forbears  to  recriminate  by  discussing 
the  question  of  the  propriety  of  attempting  such  a  reinforce- 
ment at  all,  as  well  as  of  the  disguised  and  secret  manner  in 
which  it  was  intended  to  be  effected.  And  on  this  occasion  she 
will  say  nothing  as  to  the  manner  in  which  Fort  Sumter  was 
taken  into  the  possession  of  its  present  occupants. 

The  interposition  of  the  Senators  who  have  addressed  you, 
was  a  circumstance  unexpected  by  my  Government,  and  unso- 
licited certainly  by  me.  The  Governor,  while  he  appreciates 
the  high  and  generous  motives  by  which  they  were  prompted, 
and  while  he  fully  approves  the  delay  which,  in  deference  to 
them,  has  taken  place  in  the  presentation  of  this  demand,  feels 
that  it  cannot  longer  be  withheld. 

I  conclude  with  an  extract  from  the  instructions  just  received 
by  me  from  the  Government  of  South  Carolina  : 

"  The  letter  of  the  President,  through  Mr.  Holt,  may  be  re- 
ceived as  the  reply  to  the  question  you  were  instructed  to  ask, 
as  to  his  assertion  of  his  right  to  send  reinforcements  to  Fort 
Sumter.  You  were  instructed  to  say  to  him  if  he  asserted  that 
right,  that  the  State  of  South  Carolina  regarded  such  a  right 
when  asserted,  or  with  an  attempt  at  its  exercise,  as  a  declara- 
tion of  war. 

"  If  the  President  intends  it  shall  not  be  so  understood,  it  is 


10 

proper  to  avoid  any  misconception  hereafter,  that  he  should  be 
informed  of  the  manner  in  which  the  Governor  -will  feel  bound 
to  regard  it. 

"If  the  President,  when  you  have  stated  the  reasons  which 
prompt  the  Governor  in  making  the  demand  for  the  delivery  of 
Sumter,  shall  refuse  to  deliver  the  fort  upon  the  pledge  you 
have  been  authorized  to  m-ake,  you  will  communicate  that 
refusal  without  delay  to  the  Governor.  If  the  President  shall 
not  be  prepared  to  give  you  an  immediate  answer,  you  will 
communicate  to  him  that  his  answer  may  be  transmitted  within 
a  reasonable  time  to  the  Governor  at  this  place,  (Charleston, 
South  Carolina.) 

"  The  Governor  does  not  consider  it  necessary  that  you  (I) 
should  remain  longer  in  Washington  than  is  necessary  to  exe- 
cute this,  the  closing  duty  of  your  (my)  mission,  in  the  manner 
now  indicated  to  you  (me.)  As  soon  as  the  Governor  shall 
receive  from  you  information  that  you  hava  closed  your  mis- 
sion, and  the  reply,  whatever  it  may  be,  of  the  President,  he 
will  consider  the  conduct  which  may  be  necessary  on  his  part." 

Allow  me  the  request  that  you  would,  as  soon  as  possible, 
inform  me  whether,  under  these  instructions,  I  need  await  your 
answer  in  Washington ;  and  if  not,  I  would  be  pleased  to  con- 
vey from  you  to  my  Government,  information  as  to  the  time 
when  an  answer  may  be  expected  in  Charleston. 
With  high  consideration, 

I  am,  very  respectfully, 

ISAAC  W.  HAYNE, 

Special  Envoy. 


No.  2. 

[LETTER    OF    MR.    HOLT    TO    MR.    HAYNE.] 

War  Department,  February  G,  1861. 

Sir:  The  President  of  the  United  States  has  received  your 
letter  of  the  31st  ult.,  and  has  charged  me  with  the  duty  of 
replying  thereto. 

In  the  communication  addressed  to  the  President  by  Gov- 


11 

ernor  Pickens,  under  date  of  the  12th  of  January,  and  which 
accompanies  yours  now  before  me,  his  Excellency  says  :  "  I 
have  determined  to  send  to  you  the  Hon.  I.  W.  Hayne,  the 
Attorney  General  of  the  State  of  South  Carolina,  and  have 
instructed  him  to  demand  the  surrender  of  Fort  Sumter,  in  the 
harbor  of  Charleston,  to  the  constituted  authorities  of  the 
State  of  South  Carolina.  The  demand  I  have  made  of  Major 
Anderson,  and  which  1  now  make  of  you,  is  suggested  because 
of  my  earnest  desire  to  avoid  the  bloodshed  which  a  persist- 
ence in  your  attempt  to  retain  the  possession  of  that  Fort  will 
cause,  and  which  will  be  unavailing  to  secure  to  you  that  pos- 
session, but  induce  a  calamity  most  deeply  to  be  deplored." 
The  character  of  the  demand  thus  authorized  to  be  made, 
appears  under  the  influence,  I  presume,  of  the  correspondence 
with  the  Senators  to  which  you  refer,  to  have  been  modified 
by  subsequent  instructions  of  his  Excellency,  dated  the  26th, 
and  received  by  yourself  on  the  30th  of  January,  in  which  he 
says :  "  If  it  be  so  that  Fort  Sumter  is  held  as  property,  then, 
as  property,  the  rights,  whatever  they  may  be,  of  the  United 
States,  can  be  ascertained,  and  for  the  satisfaction  of  these 
rights,  the  pledge  of  the  State  of  South  Carolina,  you  are 
authorized  to  give."  The  full  scope  and  precise  purport  of 
your  instructions,  as  thus  modified,  you  have  expressed  in  the 
following  words  :  "  I  do  not  come  as  a  military  man  to  demand 
the  surrender  of  a  fortress,  but  as  the  legal  officer  of  the  State, 
its  Attorney  General,  to  claim  for  the  State  the  exercise  of 
its  undoubted  right  of  eminent  domain,  and  to  pledge  the  State 
to  make  good  all  injury  to  the  rights  of  property  which  arise 
from  the  exercise  of  the  claim."  And  lest  this  explicit  lan- 
guage should  not  sufficiently  define  your  position,  you  add : 
'•  The  proposition  now  is  that  her  (South  Carolina's)  law  officer 
should,  under  authority  of  the  Governor  and  his  Council,  dis- 
tinctly pledge  the  faith  of  South  Carolina  to  make  such  com- 
pensation, in  regard  to  Fort  Sumter,  and  its  appurtenances  and 
contents,  to  the  full  extent  of  the  money  value  of  the  property 
of  the  United  States,  delivered  over  to  the  authorities  of  South 
Carolina  by  your  command."  You  then  adopt  his  Excellency's 
train  of  thought  upon  the  subject,  so  far  as  to  suggest  that  the 
possession  of  Fort  Sumter  by  the  United  States,  "  if  continued 
long  enough,  must  lead  to  collision,"  and  that  "  an  attack  upon 
it  would  scarcely  improve  it  as  property,  whatever  the  result. 


12 

and  if  captured,  it  would  no  longer  be  the  subject  of  account." 
The  proposal,  then,  rfow  presented  to  the  President,  is  simply 
an  offer  on  the  part  of  South  Carolina  to  buy  Fort  Sumter  and 
contents,  as  property  of  the  United  States,  sustained  by  a 
declaration,  in  effect,  that,  if  she  is  not  permitted  to  make  the 
purchase,  she  will  seize  the  fort  by  force  of  arms.  As  the 
initiation  of  a  negotiation  for  the  transfer  of  property  betWeen 
friendly  governments,  this  proposal  impresses  the  President  as 
having  assumed  a  most  unusual  form.  He  has,  however,  inves- 
tigated the  claim  on  which  it  professes  to  be  based,  apart  from 
the  declaration  that  accompanies  it.  And  it  may  be  here 
remarked  that  much  stress  has  been  laid  upon  the  employment 
of  the  words  " property"  and  "public  property,"  by  the  Presi- 
dent in  his  several  messages.  These  are  the  most  comprehen- 
-i\e  terms  which  can  be  used  in  such  a  connection,  and,  surely, 
when  referring  to  a  fort,  or  any  other  public  establishment, 
they  embrace  the  entire  and  undivided  interest  of  the  Gov- 
ernment therein.  The  title  of  the  United  States  to  Fort 
Sumter  is  complete  and  incontestable.  Were  its  interest  in 
this  property  purely  proprietary,  in  the  ordinary  acceptation 
of  the  term,  it  might  probably  be  subjected  to  the  exercise  of 
the  right  of  eminent  domain ;  but  it  has  also  political  relations 
to  it  of  a  much  higher  and  more  imposing  character  than  those 
of  mere  proprietorship.  It  has  absolute  jurisdiction  over  the 
fort,  and  the  soil  on  which  it  stands.  This  jurisdiction  con- 
sists in  the  authority  to  "  exercise  exclusive  legislation  "  over 
the  property  referred  to,  and  is,  therefore,  clearly  incompatible 
with  the  claim  of  "  eminent  domain,"  now  insisted  upon  by 
South  Carolina.  This  authority  was  not  derived  from  any 
questionable  revolutionary  source,  but  from  the  peaceful  ces- 
sion of  South  Carolina  herself,  acting  through  her  Legislature, 
under  a  provision  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 
South  Carolina  can  no  more  assert  the  right  of  eminent  domain 
over  Fort  Sumter  than  Maryland  can  assert  it  over  the  District 
of  Columbia.  The  political  and  proprietary  rights  of  the 
United  States,  in  either  case,  rest  upon  precisely  the  same 
ground. 

The  President,  however,  is  relieved  from  the  necessity  of 
further  pursuing  this  inquiry  by  the  fact  that,  whatever  may 
be  the  claim  of  South  Carolina  to  this  fort,  he  has  no  Constitu- 
tional power  to  cede  or  surrender  it.     The  property  of  the 


13 

United  States  has  been  acquired  by  force  of  public  law.  and 
can  only  be  disposed  of  under  the  same  solemn  sanctions.  The 
President,  as  the  head  of  the  Executive  branch  of  the  Govern- 
ment only,  can  no  more  sell  and  transfer  Fort  Sumter  to  South 
Carolina  than  he  can  sell  and  convey  the  Capital  of  the  United 
States  to  Maryland,  or  to  any  other  State  or  individual  seeking 
to  possess  it.  His  Excellency  the  Governor  is  too  familial* 
with  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  with  the  limit- 
ations upon  the  powers  of  the  Chief  Magistrate  of  the  Govern- 
ment it  lias  established,  not  to  appreciate  at  once  the  soundness 
of  this  legal  proposition. 

The  question  of  reinforcing  Fort  Sumter  is  so  fully  disposed 
of  in  my  letter  to  Senator  Slidell  and  others,  under  date  of 
the  22d  of  January — a  copy  of  which  accompanies  this — that 
its  discussion  will  not  now  be  renewed.  I  then  said:  "At 
the  present  moment,  it  is  not  deemed  necessary  to  reinforce 
Major  Anderson,  because  he  makes  no  such  request.  Should 
his  safety,  however,  require  reinforcements,  every  effort  will 
be  made  to  supply  them."  I  can  add  nothing  to  the  explicit- 
ness  of  this  language,  which  still  applies  to  the  existing  status. 
The  right  to  send  forward  reinforcements,  when  in  the  judg- 
ment of  the  President  the  safety  of  the  garrison  requires  them, 
rests  on  the  same  unquestionable  foundation  as  the  right  to 
occupy  the  fortress  itself. 

In  the  letter  of  Senator  Davis  and  others  to  yourself,  under 
date  of  the  15th  ultimo,  they  say  :  "  We,  therefore,  think  it 
especially  due  from  South  Carolina  to  our  States — to  say  noth- 
ing of  other  slaveholding  States — that  she  should,  as  far  as  she 
can  consistently  with  her  honor,  avoid  initiating  hostilities 
between  her  and  the  United  States,  or  any  other  power;"  and 
you  now  yourself  give  to  the  President  the  gratifying  assur- 
ance, that  "  South  Carolina  has  every  disposition  to  preserve 
the  public  peace,"  and  since  he  is  himself  sincerely  animated 
by  the  same  desire,  it  would  seem  that  this  common  and  patri- 
otic object  must  be  of  certain  attainment.  It  is  difficult,  how- 
ever, to  reconcile  with  this  assurance  the  declaration  on  your 
part,  that  "  it  is  a  consideration  of  her  (South  Carolina's)  own 
dignity  as  a  sovereign,  and  the  safety  of  her  people,  which 
prompts  her  to  demand  that  this  property  should  not  longer 
be  used  as  a  military  post  by  a  Government  she  no  longer 
acknowledges,"   and  the   thought  you  so   constantly  present, 


14 

that  this  occupation  must  lead  to  a  collision  of  arms  and  the 
prevalence  of  civil  war.  Fort  Sumter  is  in  itself  a  military 
post,  and  nothing  else,  and  it  would  seem  that  not  so  much  the 
fact  as  the  purpose  of  its  use,  should  give  to  it  a  hostile  or  a 
friendly  character.  Tin's  fortress  is  now  held  by  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  for  the  same  objects  for  which  it 
has  been  held  from  the  completion  of  its  construction.  These 
are  national  and  defensive,  and  were  a  public  enemy  now  to 
attempt  the  capture  of  Charleston,  or  the  destruction  of  the 
commerce  of  its  harbor,  the  whole  force  of  the  batteries  of  this 
fortress  would  be  at  once  exerted  for  their  protection.  How 
the  presence  of  a  small  garrison,  actuated  by  such  a  spirit  as 
this,  can  compromise  the  dignity  or  honor  of  South  Carolina, 
or  become  a  source  of  irritation  to  her  people,  the  President  is 
at  a  loss  to  understand.  The  attitude  of  that  garrison,  as  has 
been  often  declared,  is  neither  menacing,  defiant,  nor  unfriend- 
ly. It  is  acting  under  orders  to  stand  strictly  on  the  defensive, 
and  the  Government  and  people  of  South  Carolina  must  well 
know  that  they  can  never  receive  aught  but  shelter  from  its 
guns,  unless,  in  the  absence  of  all  provocation,  they  should 
assault  and  seek  its  destruction.  The  intent  with  which  this 
fortress  is  held  by  the  President  is  truthfully  stated  by  Senator 
Davis  and  others,  in  their  letter  to  yourself  of  the  15th  Janu- 
ary, in  which  they  say,  "it  is  not  held  with  any  hostile  or 
unfriendly  purpose  towards  your  State,  but  merely  as  property 
of  the  United  States,  which  the  President  deems  it  his  duty  to 
protect  and  preserve." 

If  the  announcement,  so  repeatedly  made,  of  the  President's 
pacific  purposes  in  continuing  the  occupation  of  Fort  Sumter 
until  the  question  shall  have  been  settled  by  competent  au- 
thority, has  failed  to  impress  the  government  of  South  Caro- 
lina, the  forbearing  conduct  of  his  Administration  for  the  last 
few  months,  should  be  received  as  conclusive  evidence  of  his 
sincerity.  And  if  this  forbearance,  in  view  of  the  circum- 
stances which  have  so  severely  tried  it,  be  not  accepted  as  a 
satisfactory  pledge  of  the  peaceful  policy  of  this  administra- 
tion towards  South  Carolina,  then  it  may  be  safely  affirmed, 
that  neither  language  or  conduct  can  possibly  furnish  one.  If, 
with  all  the  multiplied  proofs  which  exist,  of  the  President's 
anxiety  for  peace,  and  of  the  earnestness  with  which  he  has 
pursued   it,  the  authorities  of  that  State  shall   assault  Port 


15 

Sumter,  and  peril  the  lives  of  the  handful  of  brave  and  loyal 
men  shut  up  within  its  walls,  and  thus  plunge   our  common 
country  into  the  horrors  of  civil  war,  then  upon  them  and  those 
they  represent,  must  rest  the  responsibility. 
Yery  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

J.  HOLT,  Secretary  of  War. 

The  Hon.  I.  W.  IIayne,  Attorney  General  of  State  of  South 
Carolina. 

P.  S. — The  President  has  not.  as  you  have  been  informed, 
received  a  copy  of  the  letter  to  yourself  from  the  Senators, 
communicating  that  of  Mr.  Holt  of  the  22d  of  January. 

J.  II. 


No.  3. 

[LETTER  OF  MR.   HAYNE  TO  MR.  HOLT.] 

Washington,  February  7,  1861. 
To  His  Excellency,  James  Buchanan,  President  : 

Sir  : — Your  reply,  through  your  Secretary  of  the  War  De- 
partment, to  my  communication  of  the  31st  of  January,  cover- 
ing the  demand  of  the  Governor  of  South  Carolina  for  the 
delivery  of  Fort  Sumter,  was  received  yesterday.  Although 
the  very  distinct  and  emphatic  refusal  of  that  demand  closes 
my  mission,  I  feel  constrained  to  correct  some  strange  misap- 
prehensions into  which  your  Secretary  has  fallen. 

There  has  been  no  modification  of  the  demand  authorized 
to.be  made,  and  no  change  whatever  in  its  character,  and 
of  this  you  were  distinctly  informed  in  my  communication 
of  the  31st  of  January.  You  have  the  original  demand  as 
delivered  to  me  by  G-overnor  Pickens  on  the  12th  of  January, 
and  you  have  an  extract  from  the  further  instructions 
received  by  me,  expressly  stating  that  he,  the  Governor, 
was  "confirmed"  in  the  views  he  entertained  on  the  12th 
of  January  by  that  very  correspondence  which  you  assign 
as  the  cause  of  the  alleged  modification.  You  assume  that 
the  character  of  the  demand  has  been  modified,  yet  you  have 
from   me  but  one   communication,  and   that  asserts  the   con- 


16 

trary,  and  you  have  nothing  from  the  Governor  but  the  very 
demand  itself,  which  you  Bay  lias  been  modified.  What  pur- 
pose o'f  peace  or  conciliation  your  Secretary  could  have  had 
in  view  in  the  introduction  of  this  point  at  all,  it  is  difficult  to 
perceive. 

You  next  attempt  to  ridicule  the  proposal  presented  "as 
simply  an  offer  on  the  part  of  South  Carolina  to  buy  Port 
Sumter  and  contents  as  property  of  the  United  States,  sustained 
hy  a  declaration  in  effect  that  if  she  is  not  permitted  to  make 
the  purchase,  she  will  seize  the  fort  by  force  of  arms."  It 
is  difficult  to  consider  this  as  other  than  intentional  miscon- 
struction. You  were  told  that  South  Carolina,  as  a  separate, 
independent  sovereignty,  would  not  tolerate  the  occupation, 
by  foreign  troops,  of  a  military  post  within  her  limits,  but,  that 
inasmuch  as  you,  in  repeated  messages  and  in  your  corres- 
pondence, had  "  laid  much  stress"  upon  the  character  of  your 
duties,  arising  from  considering  forts  as  property,  South  Caro- 
lina, so  far  as  this  matter  of  property,  suggested  by  yourself, 
was  concerned,  would  make  compensation  for  all  injury  done 
the  property,  in  the  exercise  of  her  sovereign  right  of  eminent 
domain.    And  this  your  Secretary  calls  a  proposal  to  purchase' ! 

The  idea  of  purchase  is  entirely  inconsistent  with  the  asser- 
tion of  paramount  right  in  the  purchaser.  I  had  supposed 
that  an  "  interest  in  property,"  as  such,  could  be  no  other  than 
';  purely  proprietary,"  and  if  I  confined  myself  to  this  narrow- 
view  of  your  "relations"  to  Fort  Sumter,  you,  at  least,  should 
not  consider  it  the  subject  of  criticism.  Until  your  letter  of 
yesterday,  you  chose  so  to  consider  your  relations,  in  every- 
thing which  you  have  written,  or  which  has  been  written  under 
your  direction.  It  was  precisely  because  you  had  yourself 
chosen  to  place  your  action  upon  the  ground  of  "  purely  pro- 
prietary" right  that  the  proposal  of  compensation  was  made, 
and  you  now  admit  that  in  this  view  "  it  (Fort  Sumter;  would 
probably  be  subjected  to  the  exercise  of  the  right  of  eminent 
domain." 

In  your  letter  of  yesterday  (through  your  Secretary)  you 
shift  your  position.  You  claim  that  your  Government  bears  to 
Fort  Sumter  "  political  relations  of  a  much  higher  and  more 
imposing  character."  It  was  no  part  of  my  mission  to  discuss 
the  "political  relations"  of  the  United  States  Government  to 
anything  within  the  territorial  limits  of  South  Carolina.    South 


IT 

Carolina  claims  to  have  dissolved  all  political  connection  with 
your  Government,  and  to  have  destroyed  all  "  political  rela- 
tions" of  your  Government  with  everything  within  her  borders. 
She  is  unquestionably  at  this  moment  de  facto  a  separate  and 
independent  Government,  exercising  complete  sovereignty  over 
every  foot  of  her  soil  except  Fort  Sumter.  Now,  that  the  in- 
tention is  avowed  to  hold  this  place  as  a  military  post,  with  a 
claim  of  exclusive  jurisdiction  on  the  part  of  a  Government 
foreign  to  South  Carolina,  it  will  be  for  the  authorities  to  deter- 
mine what  is  the  course  proper  to  be  pursued.  It  is  vain  to 
ignore  the  fact  that  South  Carolina  is,  to  yours,  a  foreign  Gov- 
ernment, and  how  with  this  patent  fact  before  you,  you  can 
consider  the  continued  occupation  of  a  fort  in  her  harbor  a 
pacific  measure,  and  parcel  of  a  peaceful  policy,  passes  certainly 
my  comprehension. 

You  say  that  the  fort  was  garrisoned  for  our  protection,  and 
is  held  for  the  same  purposes  for  which  it  has  been  ever  held, 
since  its  construction.  Are  you  not  aware,  that  to  hold,  in  the 
territory  of  a  foreign  power,  a  fortress  against  her  will,  avow- 
edly for  the  purpose  of  protecting  her  citizens,  is,  perhaps,  the 
highest  insult  which  one  government  can  offer  to  another? 
But  Fort  Sumter  was  never  garrisoned  at  all  until  South  Caro- 
lina had  dissolved  her  connection  with  your  Government.  This 
garrison  entered  it  in  the  night,  with  every  circumstance  of 
secrecy,  after  spiking  the  guns,  and  burning  the  gun  carriages, 
and  cutting  down  the  flag-staff  of  an  adjacent,  fort,  which  was 
then  abandoned.  South  Carolina  had  not  taken  Fort  Sumter 
into  her  own  possession,  only,  because  of  her  misplaced  confi- 
dence in  a  Government  which  deceived  her.  A  fortress  occu- 
pied under  the  circumstances  above  stated,  is  considered  by 
you,  not  only  as  no  cause  of  irritation,  but  you  represent  it  as 
held  for  our  protection  ! 

Your  Excellency's  Secretary  has  indulged  in  irony  on  a  very 
grave  subject. 

As  to  the  responsibility  for  consequences,  if,  indeed,  it  does 
rest  on  us,  I  can  assure  your  Excellency  we  are  happily  uncon- 
scious of  the  fact. 

I  return  to  Charleston  to-morrow. 

With  considerations  of  high  regard, 
I  am,  very  respectfully, 

I.  W.  HAYXE,  Special  Envoy. 


Hollinger  Corp, 
pH8.5 


